jai127 40 Report post Posted August 8, 2015 I'm going to posting a bunch of stuff my partner and I have from our backfiles that we used and found to be really good resources. Internal Link File ---> T standards for memorization Fem turns ---> Self explanatory I'll be dumping all of our T shells into here once I get it all organized. Internal Link File.docx Fem turns.docx 3 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jai127 40 Report post Posted August 8, 2015 What can I say, we're T hacks! A Prioris Bad.docx A2 CX Checks (Non shell form).docx AC Must Have Advocacy Text.docx AFC bad.docx Aff Does Not Need to Run a Plan.docx Aff Must be falsifiable.docx Aff must be Topical-Extra T Bad.docx Aff must specify parameters.docx Alternative Agent Fiat Bad.docx Argument Overload Theory Shell copy.docx Can't Defend Squo.docx Condo Bad.docx Consult Cps Bad.docx Cypress Woods Theory File.doc Delay Cps Bad.docx Disclosure Theory Bad.docx Dispo Bad.docx Extra T Good.docx Flashing Shell.docx Full Cites Good.docx International Fiat Bad.docx Intrinsic Perms Bad.docx Kant Theory Shell.docx Kritik Alt Must have Solvency Advocate.docx Kritiks bad.docx MetaEthics Shell.docx Miscut Evidence Bad.docx Multi Actor Fiat Bad.docx Multiple Nibs Bad.docx Multiple Violations.docx MultipleTheoryShells Bad.docx Must Have Solvency Advocate.docx Must Run Plan.docx Must Use Cards.docx Narratives Bad.docx Neg Can't Concede To FW.docx Neg must have an Advocacy.docx Non Existent Alt Bad.docx Non Implementable K Bad.docx Nonshell theory bad.docx Operational Change Shell.docx Perms Need a Text.docx Plans Bad.docx Private Actor Fiat Bad.docx Rejection is not an Alternative.docx Severance Bad.docx Single Nib Bad.docx Single Nib Good.docx Skep Affirms Bad.docx Skep Bad.docx Skep Good.docx 10 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vmanAA738 372 Report post Posted August 8, 2015 so much t...... ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jai127 40 Report post Posted August 8, 2015 Go for the T mah frend 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Snarf 3598 Report post Posted August 8, 2015 'neg can't concede to aff fw' this is the part of LD that sucks. 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goodatthis 66 Report post Posted August 8, 2015 (edited) Thanks for the files, but I reallllllyyyyy hope you didn't ever read the Kant shell, argument overload shell (Sorry but this shell is either for use in front of a lay judge or pretty bad), the must have cards shell (fyi most novices could answer this), the neg must have advocacy shell, or the citations shell. EDIT: I saw you referred to theory shells as T shells, is that just the way your team/area refers to theory? Also kind of unrelated, but why is it that every policy theory backfile I see is full of terrible arguments? not these ones in particular, but do people actually read their theory arguments from these backfiles? (ex: "non topicality is impossible to answer because they could pick the rez to be "genocide is immoral" and I would have to defend otherwise") Edited August 8, 2015 by goodatthis Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jai127 40 Report post Posted August 9, 2015 Thanks for the files, but I reallllllyyyyy hope you didn't ever read the Kant shell, argument overload shell (Sorry but this shell is either for use in front of a lay judge or pretty bad), the must have cards shell (fyi most novices could answer this), the neg must have advocacy shell, or the citations shell. EDIT: I saw you referred to theory shells as T shells, is that just the way your team/area refers to theory? Also kind of unrelated, but why is it that every policy theory backfile I see is full of terrible arguments? not these ones in particular, but do people actually read their theory arguments from these backfiles? (ex: "non topicality is impossible to answer because they could pick the rez to be "genocide is immoral" and I would have to defend otherwise") This is all from LD. I've always been exposed to calling theory T, but most people in policy equate T=Topicality. Kant kinda made sense when I'm debating LD tho . I always used T strategically to eat up their time and so I could just spread my ableism K and have them drop some internal links to some really big impacts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
backcountryguy 143 Report post Posted August 9, 2015 These are generic looking enough I'm wondering why you put them into different files. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Miro 1470 Report post Posted August 9, 2015 Is flashing not required in LD? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goodatthis 66 Report post Posted August 9, 2015 Is flashing not required in LD? It's a common practice on the circuit, but you don't have to. There's not too much of a difference between flowing off a laptop and flowing from listening. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jai127 40 Report post Posted August 9, 2015 It's a common practice on the circuit, but you don't have to. There's not too much of a difference between flowing off a laptop and flowing from listening. ^. And most judges will probably dock speaks off your ballot if you don't flash. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jai127 40 Report post Posted August 9, 2015 These are generic looking enough I'm wondering why you put them into different files. It used to lag when I put all of my theory shells in one doc. I think it got to 300-400 pages at one point since I combined it with my generic answers files. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SnarkosaurusRex 2831 Report post Posted August 9, 2015 It's a common practice on the circuit, but you don't have to. There's not too much of a difference between flowing off a laptop and flowing from listening. Flowing from listening is preferable, a lot of debaters I've judged will miss that teams just didn't read cards or arguments and waste time responding. That being said, flashing is so you can inspect and quote their evidence. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KimJongUn 664 Report post Posted August 10, 2015 (edited) ^. And most judges will probably dock speaks off your ballot if you don't flash. and if you read any of these shells kek 'D) Kids get kicked out of college and lose any hope of gaining a valuable education after that for this kind of stuff. Vote him down to make sure he remembers this round and won’t screw himself over in the future. ' 'i voted off the aff's future college education' Edited August 10, 2015 by KimJongUn 7 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jai127 40 Report post Posted August 10, 2015 and if you read any of these shells kek 'D) Kids get kicked out of college and lose any hope of gaining a valuable education after that for this kind of stuff. Vote him down to make sure he remembers this round and won’t screw himself over in the future. ' 'i voted off the aff's future college education' Which shell is that from LOL Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KimJongUn 664 Report post Posted August 10, 2015 Flowing from listening is preferable, a lot of debaters I've judged will miss that teams just didn't read cards or arguments and waste time responding. That being said, flashing is so you can inspect and quote their evidence. nobody flows this shit unless you're fucking Richard Shmikler or a first year out that wants to make PDI's best judges list, they just scribble on their flow paper and if both teams go all in on theory flip a coin and make up some bullshit accurate depiction of LD theory: http://newinda2.blogspot.com/2014/11/rock-bottom-debater-reads-theory-aff.html 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
8off 2 Report post Posted August 10, 2015 Which shell is that from LOL Probably from the Full Cites Good Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Snarf 3598 Report post Posted August 10, 2015 I'm so tempted to delete this thread because the random selection of files I opened were all fucking terrible. 5 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kylerbuckner 1164 Report post Posted August 10, 2015 I'm so tempted to delete this thread because the random selection of files I opened were all fucking terrible. and the glang 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SnarkosaurusRex 2831 Report post Posted August 10, 2015 I'm so tempted to delete this thread because the random selection of files I opened were all fucking terrible. Wait, your answer to intrinsic perms isn't 500 words long? 7 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jai127 40 Report post Posted August 10, 2015 I'm so tempted to delete this thread because the random selection of files I opened were all fucking terrible. I just copied and pasted the theory folder from our team google drive. RIP 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goodatthis 66 Report post Posted August 11, 2015 "...Non-existent alternatives destroy reciprocity because my opponent gets to nit-pick problems with my AC without giving me an alternative advocacy to solve for my own harms. This puts me at a structural disadvantage because now not only do I need to identify a problem, I also have to figure out a way to solve it, while all the neg has to do is show that the problem exists." Damnit I knew all along that DAs were fucking abusive, how dare they pick out problems with my advocacy 6 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
danhep 3 Report post Posted August 11, 2015 "So, the aff will have to leverage on-spot analytics..." Oh no, critical thinking! 6 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goodatthis 66 Report post Posted August 11, 2015 I kind of feel bad for the OP hahaha, sorry we're grilling you so much 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Snarf 3598 Report post Posted August 12, 2015 I'm not sorry; the arguments are terrible. 7 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
